"typeof" and "property" attributes aren't valid XHTML
MatthewRudy
ArgotJob RDFa standard,
however,
all of the examples give invalid html.
eg.
http://argot-hub.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/_samples/moj/vacancy-judges-clerk.html
relies on "typeof" and "property" attributes on xhtml tags that do not
have these attributes
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fargot-hub.googlecode.com%2Fsvn%2Ftrunk%2F_samples%2Fmoj%2Fvacancy-judges-clerk.html&charset=(detect+automatically)&doctype=Inline&group=0
I assume that there needs to be a declaration of a DTD that add these
attributes,
but none of the examples have this.
How am I supposed to integrate this RDFa schema,
if it breaks our sites XHTML compliance?
Matthew Rudy Jacobs
http://gist.github.com/76867
Does this need to be declared as an XHTML2 document?
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-metaAttributes.html
2009/3/10 MatthewRudy <matthewr...@gmail.com>:
Matthew Rudy Jacobs
now I've changed to use the XHTML+RDFa 1.0 dtd.
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML+RDFa 1.0//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-rdfa-1.dtd">
and it does work.
Wondering what this is going to do to the rest of our sites.
2009/3/10 Matthew Rudy Jacobs <matthewr...@gmail.com>:
Mark Birbeck
Sorry for the delay in replying, although it did mean that you
answered your own question. :)
But you are exactly right, that if you want to have valid documents,
you can use the DTD you mention. That can also be done in the W3C
validator, using a link similar to the one you gave before, but with a
different doctype value:
<http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fargot-hub.googlecode.com%2Fsvn%2Ftrunk%2F_samples%2Fmoj%2Fvacancy-judges-clerk.html&charset=(detect+automatically)&doctype=XHTML+%2B+RDFa&fbd=1&group=0>
Note however, that since HTML is supposed to ignore unknown
attributes, the W3C validator should not really be rejecting RDFa
attributes in HTML. But it does...as you've seen.
Regards,
Mark
Mark Birbeck, webBackplane
mark.b...@webBackplane.com
http://webBackplane.com/mark-birbeck
webBackplane is a trading name of Backplane Ltd. (company number
05972288, registered office: 2nd Floor, 69/85 Tabernacle Street,
London, EC2A 4RR)
Matthew Rudy Jacobs
2009/3/11 Mark Birbeck <mark.b...@webbackplane.com>:
matically)&doctype=XHTML+%2B+RDFa&fbd=1&group=0>
>
> Note however, that since HTML is supposed to ignore unknown
> attributes, the W3C validator should not really be rejecting RDFa
> attributes in HTML. But it does...as you've seen.
Yes,
I was happy to add the attributes,
change the doctype on some sites,
and leave it.
Problem is we have about 50 clients
who all have different templates,
that all include the same html display of a Vacancy.
Even if some of our clients were happy when we say "the W3C validation
will flag these attributes as errors, but please ignore that, your
site IS XHTML compliant"
there will be some who aren't
Also,
we seemingly have some templates which are still on HTML4
as such,
even the XHTML1.0 + RDFa DTD won't cut it.
So,
I'm implementing this a different way.
I'm having the existing page,
and I am creating a dedicated RDFA page
with a link
<link rel="rdfa" herf="/this/job.rdfa" />
on the original page,
and a link back (havent decided the rel for that)
Hopefully that will be sufficient.
Although I dont know who is going to look for that link tag,
and then scrape our data semantics accordingly.
Hmm...
the troubles of an untidy multi-site system.
At least its a first step towards the goal.
Cheers Mark.
MatthewRudy